Net Neutrality and TiVo

[daveak]

http://www.streamingmedia.com/article.asp?id=11440

Do you think Net Neutrality could help or hurt TiVo video streaming options? And would an alliance with an internet provider even be beneficial to TiVo?

[ljcaswell]

Given that cableco's all over the world have either added bandwidth caps and internet overcharging schemes to their internet service, or a trying to add them to their service (ie Time Warner Cable), in a blatant attempt to prevent their customers from downloading content from services such as Netflix, iTunes, Amazon etc in favor of their own pathetic OnDemand offerings, Net Neutrality and other regulation is a must to ensure that these services survive and prosper and the consumer has choice.

Although a Tivo doesn't use a TON of bandwidth, it all certainly adds up quickly when you're faced with the prospect of overage charges per Mb after you've gone over your pathetic 5GB/month cap.

If my cableco ever successfully instituted such a cap, I would be forced to stop using these products or pay massive amounts of money for internet access. Time Warner proposed a $150/month unlimited tier in Rochester NY last summer, compared to the $30/month unlimited tier I'm on now!! What a deal - and of course, they only proposed these caps in cities where they have a monopoly on broadband access - dial up or tediously slow Frontier DSL...no fios, userve etc. in our area.

[link removed]

[schwinn]

Umm, your link is forwarding to a known attack-site? "http://www.realtaxsolutions.org/" What's up with that?

[bicker]

It now looks like there is enough opposition to the consumerists' preferred approach that what we will end up with is some compromise, which will give each side a little of what they want, but neither side all of what they want. I expect that we will end up with some limitations applied, probably in the form of metering beyond a certain amount of usage, but without any usage-specific limitations or obstructions.

So consumers will eventually have more choices, but aren't going to be able to replace $60 per month worth of content with something costing $10 (or costing nothing, for that matter). By the same token, expect to see content providers compete on "super-sizing" content offerings, at the "same" price.

[daveak]

I do not have a cap on internet bandwidth, but my provider has weasel words in case usage gets out of hand -

"******* services are considered "unlimited bandwidth," meaning *** does not charge customers based on the amount of data they actually transfer. Residential accounts are meant for attended use by an individual or family. Business accounts are meant for similar attended use, but by larger groups of users and with the addition of commercial, revenue-generating activities. ******* services are not meant for continuous or automated high-volume data transfers."

And

"*** manages its network for the benefit of all users. To maintain the quality and performance of the *** network, *** reviews the overall statistics of its user community and identifies those accounts with usage in excess of expected ranges. Normal use and occasional heavy use should not cause usage patterns to exceed the expected range. Activities that involve extended, high-volume continuous data transfer might cause your activity to exceed expected ranges. Examples of such activities might include, but are not limited to: extensive use of peer-to-peer file sharing programs, game hosting applications, or streaming video (underline added). The hosting of a server of any kind, including for personal use, is prohibited. If your usage pattern is excessive, you will be notified to either upgrade your service plan or reduce your usage pattern. If you choose neither of these options, *** reserves the right to terminate your service and/or account."

They do not say they have a cap, but I could use too much. Maybe, but I do not really know. :p I called once to ask what the expected ranges were and I was told something like, "Well, like, compared to everyone else in your service plan." So maybe they pick the top user in each plan and charge them extra? :eek: I figure I will keep doing what I want to do until they say I'm doing too much, however much that will be...

Really all I do is NetFlix and downloading videos I want to see. We are also in the process of uploading 7 years worth of photos to SmugMug, mainly for extra back up purposes.

Assuming bandwidth caps are eliminated or 'raised' with neutrality rules, I would think that is good for TiVo with the direction of the market - towards on-demand content, especially over the internet. Assuming the next TiVo box is better integrated to the internet for content, TiVo will become a better valued portal for internet available content. TiVo needs to be a gateway for internet programming and content like it is for TV - it is on the way - and if they can position themselves as the best box for program content of TV (OTA, cable, sat) AND the internet, they can become the must have entertainment box.

Bandwidth caps will discourage the use of the internet and continue to support the legacy cable cos as they are today. Who really wants that? Neutrality has got to be a plus for companies whose products encourage consumers to use more bandwidth. Like TiVo.

[bicker]

I think eventually it will all work itself out with folks getting more value paying more.

[daveak]

You are correct (and I am not irritated), I just do not want to pay even more for my usage - even if I can keep my 'unlimited' bandwidth.